[Suggestion] Balancing Heroes

from Elemental Forums

Overpowered heroes seems to be a popular topic on the message boards.  Hand-in-hand with overpowered heroes is “worthless” common units.

In the current game state, a hero can wipe out an entire squad of soldiers with one swipe of his weapon as long as his damage rating is high enough.  What happens then, is a single hero (or small group) of heroes is able to smash entire armies single-handedly.

Here is a multi-part solution:

  1. Track the number of figures in a unit: a hero has 1 unit the base militia has 3 units and so on.
  2. Flag weapons or attack types to designate their damage as group or non-group. 
  3. An attack that is “non-group” may only damage one figure in the unit.
  4. An attack that is “group” damages all figures in the unit.
  5. Most hero attacks or weapons will be “non-group” meaning that if a hero is fighting against a squad of 3 spearmen it will take 3 separate attacks to wipe out the squad.
  6. Common soldier units will deal “group” damage.

Think about it this way: how does even the mightiest of heroes somehow kill 3, 5, 10, 12 men with 1 swing of his common, unenchanted sword?  He wouldn’t, yet in Enchantress as it currently stands, he does.  If a hero is fighting a unit with 10 men he should have to hit all 10 men to wipe out the unit.  Hitting all 10 men means 10 separate turns for the hero.

By introducing the above element, tactical depth would be added to the game because even weak militia would, at the very least, hold up and hinder powerful melee heroes.

Defaulting common units to “group” damage would make the best way of fighting common units would be to use other common units and the best way to fight heroes would be to fight them with other heroes.

Because heroes would have to wipe out the figures individually, combat would be more dangerous and risky for heroes introducing the need for better planning and balance in army composition.

Some particularly rare and special weapons (or trait) would allow heroes to deal group damage and damage an entire unit with one hit (as per the battle scene with Sauron at the beginning of “The Fellowship of Ring”).

Of course monsters such as Ogres, Dragons, and others would also be able to deal group damage making them particularly dangerous to both heroes and common units.

How practical is this to code?  I would think it would be as “simple” as adding a binary value flag to the attack and creating a “figures” value per unit, but I haven’t coded anything in more than 10 years and I know nothing about “Python” or whatever it is Enchantress is coded in.  I would hope the game engine is robust enough to handle a change like this.  If it is, then it’s just a data issue (data issues suck).

5,938 views 7 replies
Reply #1 from Elemental Forums Top

***

 

Reply #2 from Elemental Forums Top


Think about it this way: how does even the mightiest of heroes somehow kill 3, 5, 10, 12 men with 1 swing of his common, unenchanted sword?  He wouldn’t, yet in Enchantress as it currently stands, he does.  If a hero is fighting a unit with 10 men he should have to hit all 10 men to wipe out the unit.  Hitting all 10 men means 10 separate turns for the hero.
 
End of quote

You have obviously never played dynasty warriors >.>

In anycase this is a horrible idea, and is a band-aid over the regular units being sucky vs champions. Not to mention units would suddenly become godlike versus all monsters (unless for some reason those don't recieve the same non-group attack penalties).

In addition, even if you are aiming for realism.. how exactly is that one spearman remaining in the group capable of killing more than 1 of the other enemy spearmen? It would only be simple to code in binary if you ignored the 'realism' of singular group units from being affected.

Someone mentioned that champions should have multiple 'attacks' similar to units, that would be an excellent idea to help curb their power against heavily armored opponents. However even without this, you have to assume the attack of a hero isn't a single swing (despite the animation) but a series of blows and maneuvers culminating in the total damage.

Siege of Centauri
Reply #3 from Elemental Forums Top

Hand-in-hand with overpowered heroes is “worthless” common units.
End of quote

This unit is worthless!!!!!

Give me a break.

Reply #4 from Elemental Forums Top

She can take them! Fear how overpowered she is!

 

Reply #5 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting CdrRogdan, reply 2
In anycase this is a horrible idea, and is a band-aid over the regular units being sucky vs champions. Not to mention units would suddenly become godlike versus all monsters (unless for some reason those don't recieve the same non-group attack penalties).
End of CdrRogdan's quote

"Group" and "un-group" would be a simple yes/no flag.  Flag all monsters as "yes" to "group damage" and this feature would only influence hero/common unit interactions.

Quoting CdrRogdan, reply 2
In addition, even if you are aiming for realism.. how exactly is that one spearman remaining in the group capable of killing more than 1 of the other enemy spearmen? It would only be simple to code in binary if you ignored the 'realism' of singular group units from being affected.
End of CdrRogdan's quote

Realism is not the aim.  Interesting tactical decisions, interesting army construction decisions, and hero balance versus common units is the aim. 

Quoting CdrRogdan, reply 2
how exactly is that one spearman remaining in the group capable of killing more than 1 of the other enemy spearmen?
End of CdrRogdan's quote

There is a certain level of abstraction inherent in all computer strategy games. 

You have to assume the single figure isn't a single soldier (despite the animation) but rather an abstract summation of the interactions of the two units--the series of blows and maneuvers the units have engaged culminating in the current status.

 

 

Reply #6 from Elemental Forums Top

I agree more with CdrRogdan. If we are aiming for maximum tactics than even with inherent abstraction it would be better if the 1 shot 1 kill system was applied universaly. If medium sized monsters need to slaughter troops stacks just give them an ability like overpower, poison breath or slam. Giant monsters should destroy mutiple units with every blow but should have abilities for dealing the real dmg to stacks.

Quoting Stupidity10, reply 1
Defaulting common units to “group” damage would make the best way of fighting common units would be to use other common units and the best way to fight heroes would be to fight them with other heroes.
End of Stupidity10's quote

Why would you want to create a system where you limit yourself so abstractly. By choosing talents you should be able to make your hero just about good at ANYTHING just not EVERYTHING. At least not until you reach high level. Besides you wouldn't be limiting champions, just warrior champions, making them much less versatile and useful than mage champions.

Reply #7 from Elemental Forums Top

Quoting Stupidity10, reply 6
Why would you want to create a system where you limit yourself so abstractly.
End of Stupidity10's quote

How is this system abstractly limited?

It is naturally intuitive that 1 person cannot overcome an army of men in hand-to-hand combat in the same amount of time that they can overcome 1 other person. 

As heroes level up and acquire more powerful skills, loot, and weapons they could be customized to be army killers or hero killers.  Creating opportunities for meaningful choices makes for an interesting game.

The other benefit of this system is in that it allows even low level units remain tactically useful.  Imagine this scenario:

2 mighty warrior heroes face off against 1 mage hero who is guarding a settlement along with 3 companies of militia (9 men each, 27 men total).  The 27 militia engage the 2 heroes and surround them.  While the warrior heroes are not seriously threatened by the militia, due to the sheer mass of men they are slowed as they hack through their opposition.  With the warriors occupied by the militia, the guardian mage is able to attack the warriors with spells and inflict enough significant damage to possibly repel the assault.

In the current system, the 2 heroes smash aside the 3 militia and opposing mage in possibly as few as 4 melee attacks.  Instead of being interesting, this becomes a throwaway situation.

Creating a "group" designation makes numbers of men valuable and meaningful.  Which is more interesting from a thematic and heroic standpoint: two heroes face off against 28 foes (14-1 odds) or 2 units face off against 4 units (2-1 odds)?

In both cases there are only 6 distinct units involved in the combat.  By creating a group designation, the units with more bodies in them have greater value than they did previously.